[od-discuss] Open Government License - Surrey 2.0

Sat Mar 14 20:54:09 UTC 2015

I believe we've discussed the OGL Surrey v2.0 sufficiently to assess
conformance.

In summary, we found the Open Government License - Surrey 1.0 to be
non-conformant and sent a formal notice to the City of Surrey making one
specific recommendation and two suggestions.  Within a few days they
released a new version of their license adopting our recommendation and
incorporating one of our two suggestions.  The suggestion that they didn't
incorporate, which we said was not strictly required for conformance, is
making their license re-usable by others.

In our subsequent discussion there were comments about advice given
concerning the license and whether or not that advice should be considered
as part of the conformance process.  I believe we have settled on the idea
that we have to assess the license based on what is written in it.

I now request that advisory council members indicate whether they agree
that the license conforms to section 2 of the open definition (v2.0) found
here:

http://opendefinition.org/od/

Please use +1 for agree and -1 for disagree.

You can find a discussion here:
https://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/od-discuss/2015-February/001278.html

and here:
https://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/od-discuss/2015-March/001293.html

You can find the text for the license here:

OGL Surrey v2.0
http://data.surrey.ca/pages/open-government-licence-surrey

We will continue counting votes for two weeks from now or until consensus
is reached, which ever is first.

Herb
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/od-discuss/attachments/20150314/40142ea9/attachment-0002.html>